ReportWire

Tag: Education funding

  • Hochul talks affordability in NY State of the State | Long Island Business News

    THE BLUEPRINT:

    • Hochul discusses universal childcare, including plans to partner with the private sector.

    • The governor proposed major investments in affordable housing and manufactured housing to lower costs and speed construction.

    • Hochul emphasized workforce development, including free community college expansion and a new nuclear energy workforce program.

    • She pushed back on critics by pledging investments without raising taxes or increasing long-term state debt.

    New York State Gov. Kathy Hochul delivered her State of the State address in Albany on Tuesday. With a focus on affordability, she spoke about universal childcare, housing, education, infrastructure, energy and more, all at a time of shifting federal funding cuts under the Trump administration.

    But New York, she said, could handle it.

    “We’ve built the boat to withstand the storm,” she said. “Because we’ve managed our money responsibly, we’re able to make transformative investments in our future. Without raising taxes. Without saddling the next generation with mounds of debt.”

    Take childcare. Last week, Hochul announced a $1.7 billion plan to expand universal childcare in New York. Statewide, there is a plan for universal pre-K for every 4-year-old by 2028. This year, the state aims to pilot community-wide childcare to provide year-round, full-day, affordable care for newborns to 3-year-olds.

    Hochul said Tuesday that she would build on the success of the state’s childcare assistance and voucher programs, “so tens of thousands more families can access high quality care for no more than $15 a week. And thanks to our strong economy, we have the revenue to get these initiatives off the ground.”

    But she said the state would also need to partner with the private sector and working with employers would “improve tax incentives for those who invest in childcare benefits.”

    Hochul said she would expand on an initiative introduced last year that offered free community college for adults pursuing education for high-demand careers that include healthcare and manufacturing. To date, an estimated 11,000 people have enrolled.

    “This year let’s expand that opportunity even further, adding new fields like logistics, air traffic control and emergency management,” she said.

    She spoke too of expanding the state’s nuclear power as part of an “all of the above” energy approach.

    “And to make sure New Yorkers are ready, we’ll launch a nuclear workforce development program, so we can forge our clean energy future together,” she said.

    But, she added, “our energy system exists to serve New Yorkers first. Data centers are vital for an innovative future. But they guzzle up tremendous amounts of energy and leave ratepayers footing the bill. So, if they want to build in New York, they’ll have to pay their fair share for the power they use and ultimately generate their own power independently.”

    Hochul also said that this year “we’ll invest an additional $250 million for affordable housing and $100 million to scale innovative, manufactured housing that lowers costs and speeds construction.

    She proposed eliminating the red tape that is “pushing up costs and pushing opportunity further out of reach.”

    And she added, that when “communities say yes to housing, infrastructure or clean energy, we’re going to let them build.”

    Other measures include potentially banning artificial intelligence in political ads, combatting auto insurance fraud and eliminating taxes on tips.

    Hochul, a Democrat, gave her State of the State address as she campaigns for reelection this year.

    Nassau County Executive Bruce Blakeman, a Republican, is also vying for the gubernatorial seat.

    “Albany keeps repeating the same cycle — spend more, tax more, and promise it will work next time,” Blakeman said in a statement. “Programs marketed as ‘free’ are paid for with higher taxes or long-term debt, and working families are left holding the bill.”

    Matt Cohen, president and CEO of the Long Island Association, said in a written statement that “2026 will be a pivotal year for elected officials in tackling the affordability crisis.”

    He added that Hochul’s “commitment to supporting childcare, which helps boost the workforce and streamlining the regulatory process so developers can build sorely needed new housing are important steps on the long road of addressing our shared challenges on Long Island.”


    Adina Genn

    Source link

  • NC teachers to run in GOP primary for state legislature. Will it have an impact?

    Members of the N.C. House of Representatives stand as their name is announced during the opening session of the N.C. House of Representatives Wednesday, Jan. 11, 2023.

    Members of the N.C. House of Representatives stand as their name is announced during the opening session of the N.C. House of Representatives Wednesday, Jan. 11, 2023.

    ehyman@newsobserver.com

    A group of current and retired teachers is hoping to shake up North Carolina government by being elected as state lawmakers.

    NC Educators on the Ballot recruited six teachers — all of whom were previously registered as Democrats or as unaffiliated voters — to run in the March Republican primary election for the General Assembly. They’re taking on incumbent and former Republican lawmakers in GOP-leaning districts.

    “We felt as a group putting educators with experience into the place where decisions are being made could impact statewide education policy and benefit students and benefit schools across the state of North Carolina,” Patricia Saylor, the organizer of NC Educators on the Ballot, said in an interview with The News & Observer.

    Saylor, a retired Durham and Chapel Hill-Carrboro teacher and registered Democrat, formed NC Educators on the Ballot over the summer. The group’s slate of six candidates held their first in-person planning meeting on Tuesday in Durham.

    The candidates are:

    • Pamela Ayscue running in House District 32 (Granville and Vance counties) against former Rep. Frank Sossamon.
    • Michele Joyner-Dinwiddie running in House District 35 (Wake County) against Rep. Mike Schietzelt.
    • Lisa Deaton Koperski running in House District 89 (Catawba and Iredell counties) against Rep. Mitchell Setzer.
    • Kelly VanHorn running in House District 105 (Mecklenburg County) against Rep. Tricia Cotham.
    • Chris Wilson running in House District 117 (Henderson County) against Rep. Jennifer Balkcom.
    • Pam Zanni running in House District 81 (Davidson County) against Rep. Larry Potts.

    The low $13,951 salary for state lawmakers kept some teachers from running, according to Saylor.

    It’s rare for an active teacher to be a lawmaker. But some school districts have made schedule accommodations to allow teachers to serve in the General Assembly.

    NC GOP: New group is trying to ‘mislead voters’

    The North Carolina Republican Party questioned the group’s motives. The primary occurs during a time when Republicans are one seat shy in the House of gaining a veto-proof legislative majority.

    “NC Educators on the Ballot is led by a registered Democrat to interfere and mislead voters in Republican primaries,” the N.C. GOP said in a statement to The N&O. “Republicans have led on education policy for years, from improving classroom performance to expanding school choice for every family.

    “Conservative policies are delivering positive results for students, parents, and our education system while the left-wing bureaucracy continues supporting failed ideas and tired rhetoric.”

    Saylor and the candidates deny they are trying to mislead voters. Instead, Saylor said the group encouraged people to run in races where they could have an impact on the state.

    “With the way our state is carved up into voter districts in a lot of places, the decision about who is going to Raleigh doesn’t happen in the November general election,” Saylor said. “It happens in the March primary. And so if that’s where it’s going to happen, then that’s where these people are entering the conversation and entering the race.”

    Kelly VanHorn, a Charlotte-Mecklenburg teacher, described the group’s candidates as moderates.

    “We can fit in the middle of either party,” said VanHorn, who is running for House District 105. “But in my district, I have to go where there’s opportunity to win.”

    VanHorn had been a registered Democrat before meeting state requirements to register as a Republican to run in the primary. She’s running against Rep. Tricia Cotham, who switched to Republican after winning her legislative seat as a Democrat.

    Candidates say public schools are underfunded

    The shared reason given by the group’s candidates is their concern that public schools aren’t getting enough funding.

    A recently released report from the Education Law Center ranked North Carolina at the bottom nationally in state funding for schools. North Carolina ranks 43rd in the nation in average teacher pay and 39th in beginning teacher pay, according to the National Education Association.

    At the same time, the Republican-controlled General Assembly has expanded the Opportunity Scholarship program so that any family can get a private school voucher.

    “Are you trying to shut down public education?” said Pam Zanni, a retired teacher running in House District 81. “I mean, is that what your goal is? I don’t understand the idea of underfunding schools, under funding teachers, when you’re talking about your future population.”

    All six candidates back the Leandro plan, a court-ordered plan for increasing public education spending to try to provide every student their state constitutional right to a sound, basic education. The plan is on hold while it’s appealed by GOP legislative leaders who say that only lawmakers can order the spending of state money.

    Pamela Ayscue is a retired teacher in Vance County Schools, which was one of the original plaintiffs in the Leandro lawsuit when it was filed in 1994.

    “We are still waiting,” said Ayscue, who is running for House District 32. “So it’s very personal, because it’s my district that is suffering.”

    Candidates say they’re not ‘going to blindly follow’ GOP

    If elected, the candidates said they would not blindly toe the Republican Party line on issues.

    “We’re not going to be people that do what leadership tells us to do,” Zanni said. “We’re going to be people that represent our districts, our people, our kids, our schools and our teachers, because that’s what our districts deserve. That’s what we’re supposed to be elected for, not to say ‘yes, sir, may I have another.’”

    VanHorn said legislators are supposed to “put politics aside and put the people first.’

    “I’m not going to blindly follow one party or the other,” VanHorn said. “It depends on the issue and what my district needs.”

    Chris Wilson, a Polk County middle school teacher running in House District 117, said having teachers in the legislature will help get things done. North Carolina is the only state that didn’t pass a comprehensive state budget in 2025.

    “What group of people learn to compromise more than teachers?” Wilson said. “So if you really want government to work, you probably should hire a lot more women and a lot more teachers, because we have to live in that space where you constantly have to compromise to get to a greater goal.”

    Related Stories from Charlotte Observer

    T. Keung Hui

    The News & Observer

    T. Keung Hui has covered K-12 education for the News & Observer since 1999, helping parents, students, school employees and the community understand the vital role education plays in North Carolina. His primary focus is Wake County, but he also covers statewide education issues.

    T. Keung Hui

    Source link

  • China exploits US-funded research on nuclear technology, a congressional report says

    WASHINGTON — China is exploiting partnerships with U.S. researchers funded by the Department of Energy to provide the Chinese military with access to sensitive nuclear technology and other innovations with economic and national security applications, according to a congressional report published Wednesday.

    The authors of the report say the U.S. must do more to protect high-tech research and ensure that the results of taxpayer-funded work don’t end up benefiting Beijing. They recommended several changes to better protect scientific research in the U.S., including new policies for the Department of Energy to use when deciding whether to fund work that involves Chinese partnerships.

    The investigation is part of a congressional push to raise a firewall blocking U.S. research from boosting China’s military buildup when the two countries are locked in a tech and arms rivalry that will shape the future global order.

    Investigators from the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party and the House Committee on Education and the Workforce identified more than 4,300 academic papers published between June 2023 and June of this year that involved collaborations between DOE-funded scientists and Chinese researchers. About half of the papers involved Chinese researchers affiliated with China’s military or industrial base.

    Particularly concerning, investigators found that federal funds went to research collaborations with Chinese state-owned laboratories and universities that work directly for China’s military, including some listed in a Pentagon database of Chinese military companies with operations in the U.S. The report also detailed collaborations between U.S. researchers and groups blamed for cyberattacks as well as human rights abuses in China.

    The Energy Department routinely funds advanced research into nuclear energy and the development and disposal of nuclear weaponry, along with a long list of other high-tech fields like quantum computing, materials science and physics. It doles out hundreds of millions of dollars each year for research. The department oversees 17 national laboratories that have led the development in many technologies.

    The report followed a number of congressional investigations into federally funded research involving Chinese scientists and researchers. Last year, a report released by Republicans found that partnerships between U.S. and Chinese universities over the past decade had allowed hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding to help Beijing develop critical technology that could help strengthen its military. Another investigation this year revealed that the Pentagon in a recent two-year period funded hundreds of projects in collaboration with Chinese entities linked to China’s defense industry.

    The Energy Department has failed for decades to take steps to ensure the research it funds doesn’t benefit China, the report’s authors found. They made several recommendations to tighten the rules, including a new standardized approach to assessing the national security risks of research, as well as requirements that the department share information about research ties with China with other U.S. government agencies to make it easier to spot problems.

    “These longstanding policy failures and inaction have left taxpayer-funded research vulnerable to exploitation by China’s defense research and industrial base and state-directed technology transfer activities,” the authors concluded.

    The Department of Energy did not immediately respond to questions about the report and its recommendations. A message seeking comment was left with the Chinese Embassy in Washington.

    Rep. John Moolenaar, a Michigan Republican who chairs the select committee, said in a statement that the “investigation reveals a deeply alarming problem: The Department of Energy failed to ensure the security of its research and it put American taxpayers on the hook for funding the military rise of our nation’s foremost adversary.”

    Moolenaar this year introduced legislation aimed at preventing research funding in science and technology and defense from going to collaborations or partnerships with “foreign adversary-controlled” entities that pose a national security risk.

    The legislation cleared the House but failed to advance to become part of the annual sweeping defense policy bill. It was met with strong opposition from scientists and researchers, who argued that the measures were too broad and could chill collaboration and undermine America’s competitive edge in science and technology.

    In an October letter, a group of more than 750 faculty members and senior staffers from American universities told congressional leaders overseeing the armed services that the U.S. is in a global competition for talent. They called for “very careful and targeted measures for risk management” to address security concerns.

    Source link

  • MacKenzie Scott’s college roommate once loaned her $1K. Now it’s the billionaire’s turn to invest

    NEW YORK (AP) — MacKenzie Scott, one of the world’s wealthiest women and most influential philanthropists, is now known for her “no strings attached” surprise grantmaking. But, as a Princeton University sophomore, she learned what it was like to be on the receiving end of generosity.

    Facing the prospect of dropping out if she couldn’t come up with $1,000, Scott was crying when her roommate, Jeannie Tarkenton, found her and got her dad to loan Scott the money.

    “I would have given MacKenzie my left kidney,” Tarkenton told the Associated Press recently. “Like, that’s just what you do for friends.”

    Today, Scott’s net worth is around $34 billion, according to Forbes. In October, Scott wrote that Tarkenton’s act is among the many personal kindnesses she has considered as she has donated more than $19 billion of the wealth she amassed mostly through Amazon shares as part of her 2019 divorce from company founder Jeff Bezos. And when Tarkenton started Funding U, a lending company that offers last-gap, merit-based loans to low-income students without co-signers, Scott said she jumped at the chance to help.

    A quarter century passed between the end of their sophomore year and Funding U’s creation, a period when Tarkenton realized just how many more students were being pushed into her former roommate’s position by the rising cost of college. That Scott took an interest in her old friend’s mission to help economically disadvantaged students finance school is unsurprising. Her unusual gifts — which she rarely discusses or discloses outside of essays and a database on her website, Yield Giving — tend to focus on issues of equity, higher education and economic security.

    But the revelation of Scott’s Funding U support offers a new glimpse into her investments. Scott wrote last year that she would invest in “mission-aligned ventures” led by “undercapitalized groups” that focus on “for-profit solutions” to the challenges that her philanthropy seeks to address. However, this is among the few confirmed publicly.

    “She’s looking for innovative ways to create opportunity for those that don’t have it,” said Marybeth Gasman, who runs Rutgers’ Center for Minority Serving Institutions and follows Scott’s donations. “I have to say, as somebody who went to school on a Pell Grant and who came from an extremely low-income family, that’s really meaningful.”

    Amplifying impact

    Scott, in many ways, resembled the exact students that Funding U seeks to serve. Tarkenton recalled the undergraduate Scott as a “hardworking student with very good grades” who was “highly focused” and had already been accepted into a competitive program.

    Her lending company plugs those sorts of details — student transcripts and internship experiences, for example— into an algorithm that determines the likelihood applicants will complete college, get a job and make enough money to pay back the loan.

    Tarkenton suggested that this formula is fairer — and more predictive — than existing criteria that determine loan eligibility based on the credit histories of students or their co-signers.

    Scott provides most of the “junior debt” they use to reduce the risk for larger investments from banks such as Goldman Sachs, according to Tarkenton. She is among a handful of philanthropists who provide 30 cents for every dollar that Funding U loans. These funders lend at concessionary rates, meaning they make less money back than the market suggests they should and wait a longer period of time to recoup the money.

    Funding U gets the other 70% from banks, who support them to comply with federal laws aimed at preventing anti-poor discrimination by requiring banks to make loans that benefit their communities.

    “I wanted to combine capital from people who were participating in this because they cared about the underlying person,” Tarkenton said, “and also, knowing that scale of philanthropy wasn’t quite big enough, bring to the table some sort of market solution alongside that capital.”

    A philanthropic endeavor?

    Tarkenton is clear: the endeavor isn’t philanthropic. Funding U is a company, after all, and Scott will eventually get her money back — just as she repaid Tarkenton’s informal loan all those years ago at Princeton.

    But the approach represents a model that Scott’s former roommate thinks more philanthropists should embrace. Tarkenton said there’s more space for the likes of Scott to “bring a spirit of investment” that serves a “greater good” but isn’t purely charitable.

    “I think philanthropists can get a little messier and do more with their money,” Tarkenton said. “I’m all about pushing philanthropists in a very aligned way.”

    It’s why she started Funding U. Working at an Atlanta-based adult literacy nonprofit, Tarkenton said she noticed persistent disparities in degree completion rates based on socioeconomic status. She found the problem too big for philanthropy to solve. But the need was too small for most market players to care about addressing, she said.

    Scott described the Funding U loans as “generosity- and gratitude-powered” in an Oct. 15 essay about the ripple effects of kindness.

    Panorama founder Gabrielle Fitzgerald, whose social impact nonprofit tracks Scott’s giving, said the investment is “very consistent with her approach to ensuring students have access to higher education.” She said many funders see impact investing as a critical part of their giving portfolios.

    “It shows that she’s using all the tools at her disposal to pursue her goals,” Fitzgerald said.

    And the full circle impact of Tarkenton’s college-era loan?

    “It’s a really lovely story in a time when we’re not seeing a lot of kindness and generosity,” Fitzgerald added. “And just a reminder that helping your fellow humans is both a good thing to do at the time and something that could have a massive impact down the road.”

    ___

    Associated Press coverage of philanthropy and nonprofits receives support through the AP’s collaboration with The Conversation US, with funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The AP is solely responsible for this content. For all of AP’s philanthropy coverage, visit https://apnews.com/hub/philanthropy.

    Source link

  • Trump’s wind-down of the Education Department leaves schools fearing disruption

    WASHINGTON — The Trump administration says its plan to dismantle the Education Department offers a fix for the nation’s lagging academics — a solution that could free schools from the strictures of federal influence.

    Yet to some school and state officials, the plan appears to add more bureaucracy, with no clear benefit for students who struggle with math or reading.

    Instead of being housed in a single agency, much of the Education Department’s work now will be spread across four other federal departments. For President Donald Trump, it’s a step toward fully closing the department and giving states more power over schooling. Yet many states say it will complicate their role as intermediaries between local schools and the federal government.

    The plan increases bureaucracy fivefold, Washington state’s education chief said, “undoubtedly creating confusion and duplicity” for educators and families. His counterpart in California said the plan is “clearly less efficient” and invites disruption. Maryland’s superintendent raised concerns about “the challenges of coordinating efforts with multiple federal agencies.”

    “States were not engaged in this process, and this is not what we have asked for — or what our students need,” said Jill Underly, Wisconsin’s state superintendent. Underly urged the Trump administration to give states greater flexibility and cut down on standardized testing requirements.

    Education Secretary Linda McMahon said schools will continue receiving federal money without disruption. Ultimately, schools will have more money and flexibility to serve students without the existence of the Education Department, she said.

    Yet the department is not gone — only Congress has the power to abolish it. In the meantime, McMahon’s plan leaves the agency in a version of federal limbo. The Labor Department will take over most funding and support for the country’s schools, but the Education Department will retain some duties, including policy guidance and broad supervision of Labor’s education work.

    Similar deals will offload programs to the Department of Health and Human Services, the State Department and the Interior Department. The agreements were signed days before the government shutdown and announced Tuesday.

    Inking agreements to share work with other departments isn’t new: The Education Department already had dozens of such agreements before Trump took office. And local school officials routinely work with other agencies, including the U.S. Agriculture Department, which oversees school meals. What’s different this time is the scale of the programs offloaded — the majority of the Education Department’s funding for schools, for instance.

    Yet Virginia schools chief Emily Anne Gullickson, for one, said schools are accustomed to working with multiple federal agencies, and she welcomed the administration’s efforts to give states more control.

    Response to the plan has mostly been drawn along political lines, with Democrats saying the shakeup will hurt America’s most vulnerable students. Republicans in Congress called it a victory over bureaucracy.

    Yet some conservatives pushed back against the dismantling. U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, an Alaska Republican, said on social media that moving programs to agencies without policy expertise could hurt young people. And Margaret Spellings, a former education secretary to Republican President George W. Bush, called it a distraction to a national education crisis.

    “Moving programs from one department to another does not actually eliminate the federal bureaucracy, and it may make the system harder for students, teachers and families to navigate and get the support they need,” Spellings said in a statement.

    There’s little debate about the need for change in America’s schooling. Its math and reading scores have plummeted in the wake of COVID-19. Before that, reading scores had been stagnant for decades, and math scores weren’t much better.

    McMahon said that’s evidence the Education Department has failed and isn’t needed. At a White House briefing Thursday, she called her plan a “hard reset” that does not halt federal support but ends “federal micromanagement.”

    Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers union and one of McMahon’s sharpest opponents, questioned the logic in her plan.

    “Why would you put a new infrastructure together, a new bureaucracy that nobody knows anything about, and take the old bureaucracy and destroy it, instead of making the old bureaucracy more efficient?” Weingarten said at a Wednesday event.

    The full impact of the shakeup may not be clear for months, but already it’s stoking anxiety among states and school districts that have come to rely on the Education Department for its policy expertise. One of the agency’s roles is to serve as a hotline for questions about complicated funding formulas, special education laws and more.

    The department has not said whether officials who serve that role will keep their jobs in the transition. Without that help, schools would have few options to clarify what can and can’t be paid for with federal money, said David Law, superintendent of Minnetonka Public Schools in Minnesota.

    “What could happen is services are not provided because you don’t have an answer,” said Law, who is also president of AASA, a national association of school superintendents.

    Some question whether other federal departments have the capacity to take on an influx of new work. The Labor Department will take over Title I, an $18 billion grant program that serves 26 million students in low-income areas. It’s going to a Labor office that now handles grants serving only 130,000 people a year, said Angela Hanks, who led the Labor office under former President Joe Biden.

    At best, Hanks said, it will “unleash chaos on school districts, and ultimately, on our kids.”

    In Salem, Massachusetts, the 4,000-student school system receives about $6 million in federal funding that helps support services for students who are low-income, homeless or still mastering English, Superintendent Stephen Zrike said. He fears moving those programs to the Labor Department could bring new “rules of engagement.”

    “We don’t know what other stipulations will be attached to the funding,” he said. “The level of uncertainty is enormous.”

    Other critics have noted the Education Department was created to consolidate education programs that were spread across multiple agencies.

    Rep. Bobby Scott, D-Va., the ranking member on the House Education and Workforce Committee, urged McMahon to rethink her plan. He cited the 1979 law establishing the department, which said dispersion had resulted in “fragmented, duplicative, and often inconsistent Federal policies relating to education.”

    ___

    AP education writers Moriah Balingit in Washington, Bianca Vázquez Toness in Boston and Makiya Seminera in Raleigh, N.C., contributed to this report.

    ___

    The Associated Press’ education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

    Source link

  • Getting the story: How an AP reporter chronicled a sensitive story about school and eviction

    ATLANTA (AP) — As an education reporter, I’ve heard teachers worry that the most pernicious challenges their students face, like poverty or housing insecurity, are beyond the realm of what schools can fix.

    I wanted to understand better how the rising cost of housing and the prevalence of eviction could undermine a young person’s ability to thrive in school and in life.

    Research shows schoolchildren threatened with eviction are more likely to transfer to another school, often one with less funding, more poverty and lower test scores. They’re more likely to miss school, and those who end up transferring are suspended more often.

    I’ve seen this firsthand through my own reporting. A few years ago, when I was writing about students who missed school for months or longer, many of them said a housing disruption had first kept them out of class. They lost their home, ended up staying with a relative, and didn’t get back in school for weeks or longer.

    So I called up a parent organizer in Atlanta who had introduced me to other families struggling with that city’s rapid gentrification.

    She told me about Sechita McNair, a talkative mother of three trying to move back to Atlanta after an eviction so her kids could stay in their schools.

    McNair was one of the easiest people I’ve ever written about because she was a film-industry veteran. She understood my desire to document or understand every step in the process of getting evicted or advocating for her children. I never had to explain why I was asking a question, why I wanted so much detail about where she was when she received a certain phone call, or why I wanted her to send me emails or documents. She’s an open book and sincerely thought others might benefit from reading about her perseverance and resourcefulness.

    She also was challenging to write about because her life was extremely complicated. McNair has immense family responsibilities, without support from other relatives, yet she holds a deep belief that things will work out if she just keeps moving. Her situation and plans would change rapidly. Sometimes I struggled to keep up.

    I traveled to Atlanta three times over several months to visit McNair, and in between we were in constant touch. I often spoke to her while she drove the kids to and from school or while she picked up orders for Uber Eats. The result is a close-up portrait of life as a single mother trying to swim upstream while carrying three boys on her back.

    This is the hardest part: Everything McNair was working toward — getting her kids back into Atlanta — is exactly what researchers would say she should do. She should keep her kids in the same school so they can be in a stable environment.

    But so far, it hasn’t been enough.

    ____

    Bianca Vázquez Toness covers the intersection of education and children’s well-being. She led the nation in showing how many students were missing school after the pandemic, and her work was honored as a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize.

    ____

    The Associated Press’ education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

    Source link

  • Some Head Start preschools shutter as government shutdown continues

    The government shutdown is triggering a wave of closures of Head Start centers, leaving working parents scrambling for child care and shutting some of the nation’s neediest children out of preschool.

    Dozens of centers are missing out on federal grant payments that were due to arrive Nov. 1. Some say they’ll close indefinitely, while others are staying afloat with emergency funding from local governments and school districts. The closures mean Head Start students — who come from low-income households, are homeless or are in foster care — are missing out on preschool, where they are fed two meals a day and receive therapy vital to their development.

    “Children love school, and the fact that they can’t go is breaking their hearts,” said Sarah Sloan, who oversees small-town Head Start centers in Scioto County, Ohio. Staff told families they planned to close Monday. “It’s hampering our families’ ability to put food on the table and to know that their children are safe during the day.”

    A half-dozen Head Start programs never received grants that were anticipated in October, but there are now 140 programs that have not received their annual infusion of federal funding. All told, the programs have capacity to assist 65,000 preschoolers and expectant parents.

    Among the preschools closing as of Monday are 24 Migrant and Seasonal Head Start centers spread across five states. Those centers, created to assist the children of migrant farmworkers, typically operate on 10- to 12-hour days to accommodate the long hours parents work on farms.

    Children attending the centers in Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, Alabama and Oklahoma recently came home with fliers warning of possible closures, along with other parent notifications. Those centers serving more than 1,100 children will now remain closed until the shutdown ends, said East Coast Migrant Head Start Project CEO Javier Gonzalez. About 900 staff members across the centers also have been furloughed.

    In the absence of other options for child care, some parents’ only option may be to bring their young child to the fields where they work, Gonzalez said.

    Many of the families that qualify for the federal preschool program also depend on food aid through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, better known as SNAP or food stamps. That program also was on track to run dry of money due to the shutdown, although a pair of federal judges on Friday ordered the Trump administration to keep the program running with emergency reserve funds.

    That means many Head Start families have been worried about food aid, along with the child care they rely on to make ends meet. A day without child care means a day without work for many parents — and a day without pay.

    In Kansas City, Missouri, Jhanee Hunt teaches toddlers at a Head Start site, the Emmanuel Family and Child Development Center, where her 6-month-old son is cared for in another classroom. The center said it can scrape up enough money to stay open for a few weeks, but the money won’t last much beyond November.

    At dropoff, she said, parents often are wearing uniforms for fast food restaurants like Wendy’s and McDonald’s. Some work as certified nurse assistants in nursing homes. None have much extra money. The most urgent concern right now is food, she said.

    “A lot of the parents, they’re, you know, going around trying to find food pantries,” she said. “A parent actually asked me, do I know a food pantry?”

    More than 90% of the center’s families rely on SNAP food assistance, said Deborah Mann, the center’s executive director. One construction company offered to help fill the grocery carts of some families that use the center. But overall, families are distressed, she said.

    “We’ve had parents crying. We’ve had parents just don’t know what to do,” Mann said.

    Launched six decades ago as part of President Lyndon B. Johnson’s War on Poverty, Head Start programs provide a range of services beyond early education, such as medical and dental screenings, school meals and family support to children from low-income households who can’t afford other child care options.

    The initiative is funded almost entirely by the federal government, leaving it with little cushion from funding disruptions.

    Some that have missed out on grant payments have managed to remain open, with philanthropies, school districts and local governments filling in gaps. Others are relying on fast-dwindling reserves and warn they can’t keep their doors open for much longer.

    “If the government doesn’t open back up, we will be providing less services each week,” said Rekah Strong, who heads a social services nonprofit that runs Head Start centers in southern Washington state. She’s already had to close one center and several classrooms and cut back home-based visiting services. “It feels more bleak every day.”

    In Florida, Head Start centers in Tallahassee and surrounding Leon County closed Oct. 27, but then reopened the next day thanks to a grant from Children’s Services Council of Leon County. The local school district and churches have stepped up to provide meals for the children.

    “It takes a village to raise a child, and our village has come together,” said Nina Self, interim CEO of Capital Area Community Action Agency.

    But children in rural Jefferson and Franklin counties, where the agency runs two small Head Start centers, were not as lucky. They’ve been closed since late October.

    ___

    The Associated Press’ education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

    Source link

  • Brown University rejects Trump’s offer for priority funding, citing concerns over academic freedom

    WASHINGTON — WASHINGTON (AP) — Brown University is rejecting a Trump administration proposal that would provide favorable access to funding in exchange for a wide range of commitments, saying the deal would curtail academic freedom and undermine the university’s independence.

    Brown is the latest university to turn down the proposal, which White House officials said would bring “multiple positive benefits” including “substantial and meaningful federal grants.” The Massachusetts Institute of Technology backed away from the proposal last week after its president said it would restrict free speech and campus autonomy.

    Brown President Christina Paxson turned down the proposal on Wednesday in a letter to Education Secretary Linda McMahon and White House officials. The Ivy League university in Providence, Rhode Island is aligned with some of the provisions in the offer, she said — including commitments to affordability and equal opportunity in admissions — but can’t agree to others.

    “I am concerned that the Compact by its nature and by various provisions would restrict academic freedom and undermine the autonomy of Brown’s governance, critically compromising our ability to fulfill our mission,” Paxson wrote.

    Brown and MIT were among nine universities invited this month to become “initial signatories” to the proposal. Officials at the University of Texas system said they were honored to be invited, while most others have remained quiet. The Trump administration invited feedback from universities by Oct. 20 and requested decisions no later than Nov. 21.

    Brown previously struck a deal with the Trump administration to restore lost research funding and end federal investigations into discrimination.

    In that agreement, finalized in July, Brown agreed to a $50 million payout to workforce organizations in Rhode Island. It also agreed to adopt the federal government’s definition of “male” and “female,” to eliminate diversity targets in admissions and to renew partnerships with Israeli academics, among other terms.

    Unlike that deal — which includes a clause affirming Brown’s academic freedom — Paxson said the new proposal lacks any guarantee that the university would retain control over its curriculum or academic speech. Her rejection is in line with the views of the “vast majority of Brown stakeholders,” Paxson wrote.

    In a post on his Truth Social platform on Sunday, President Donald Trump suggested other campuses can step forward to participate in the compact. Those that want to return to “the pursuit of Truth and Achievement,” he said, “are invited to enter into a forward looking Agreement with the Federal Government to help bring about the Golden Age of Academic Excellence in Higher Education.”

    In its letter to universities, the administration said the compact would strengthen and renew the “mutually beneficial relationship” between universities and the government. The compact is a proactive attempt at reform even as the government continues enforcement through other means, the letter said.

    The proposal includes several commitments around admissions, women’s sports and free speech. Much of it centers on promoting conservative viewpoints, including by abolishing “institutional units that purposefully punish, belittle, and even spark violence against conservative ideas.”

    ___

    The Associated Press’ education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

    Source link

  • Michelle Obama’s Girls Opportunity Alliance rallying $2.5M for grassroots education

    NEW YORK — Former first lady Michelle Obama is putting new force behind efforts to ensure girls overcome educational barriers in some of the world’s most economically disadvantaged areas.

    The Obama Foundation’s Girls Opportunity Alliance pledged Saturday to rally $2.5 million for dozens of grassroots groups who advance adolescent girls’ education by covering school-related costs, challenging patriarchal practices such as child marriage, counseling survivors of sexual abuse and providing other forms of support.

    “These groups are changing the way girls see themselves in their own communities and in our world, helping create the leaders we need for the brighter future we all deserve,” Obama said in a video released Oct. 11, the International Day of the Girl. “Because when our girls succeed, we all do.”

    Nearly three-quarters of the 119 million girls out of school worldwide are of secondary school-age, according to the United Nations Children’s Fund. Girls Opportunity Alliance — an outgrowth of an Obama White House initiative that invested $1 billion in U.S. government programs promoting adolescent girls’ education abroad — launched in 2018 with a focus on helping that population between ages 10-19 graduate.

    But the latest announcement comes amid stark warnings from international aid groups that budget cuts will roll back recent progress. UNICEF projects that a 24% drop in wealthy countries’ global education funding will push six million girls out of school by the end of next year.

    “The need right now, I think more than ever, is crucial,” Girls Opportunity Alliance Executive Director Tiffany Drake said. “We were just in Mauritius and we heard it time and time again that organizations need funding. They need support.”

    Girls Opportunity Alliance’s early October convening in Mauritius brought together Asian and African members of its network. The great demands on local leaders doing tireless work with little resources made it, in Drake’s view, perhaps the most moving gathering they’ve hosted.

    But Jackie Bomboma, the founder of Young Strong Mothers Foundation in Tanzania, said connecting with other powerful women there left her encouraged with the knowledge that she’s not alone. A recipient of GOA’s latest grants, she said the Obama Foundation’s endorsement not only brings financial support, but increased trust from the international community and additional channels to get resources.

    Growing up without a mother and having survived teenage pregnancy, Bomboma said Obama’s example has also instilled confidence in her and the girls she serves. Her nonprofit provides psychological services, vocational training, entrepreneurship skills development and sexual health lessons to hundreds of girls at risk of child marriage, teenage pregnancy and school dropout.

    “We call ourselves ‘watoto wa Michelle Obama,’ which means ‘the children of Michelle Obama,’” she said. “So, everyone feels so proud to have such a mother who is very strong, who is very powerful and who is very loving.”

    The Girls Opportunity Alliance fund is intentionally designed to provide a range of support. Drake said anyone can apply for up to $50,000. The grant does not support general operations but instead goes toward a specific project outlined by the recipient.

    Once they’ve joined the network, community leaders have access to monthly training sessions online and in-person gatherings, where they share strategies and learn from larger nongovernmental organizations such as UNICEF and Save the Children.

    Girls Opportunity Alliance funds an undisclosed amount and then uses its wide reach to help organizations raise the rest on GoFundMe pages. The campaigns are promoted publicly on its social media accounts and throughout its donor network of celebrities and corporations.

    The idea, according to Drake, was to use their “megaphone” to heap additional attention on and garner more support for organizations that often struggle to get by in more remote locations. Girls Opportunity Alliance hopes everyday individuals are inspired to join them.

    “We didn’t want to just tell people and say, ‘Google how you can help,’ Drake said. “We wanted to give them a place where they can take action.”

    ___

    Associated Press coverage of philanthropy and nonprofits receives support through the AP’s collaboration with The Conversation US, with funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The AP is solely responsible for this content. For all of AP’s philanthropy coverage, visit https://apnews.com/hub/philanthropy.

    Source link

  • Trump administration takes first steps to restore Harvard’s funding, but money isn’t flowing yet

    WASHINGTON — Harvard University says it has started receiving notices that many federal grants halted by the Trump administration will be reinstated after a federal judge ruled that the cuts were illegal.

    It’s an early signal that federal research funding could begin flowing to Harvard after months of deadlock with the White House, but it’s yet to be seen if money will arrive. The government has said it will appeal the judge’s decision.

    Reinstatement notices have started arriving from several federal agencies, but so far no payments have been received, Harvard spokesperson Jason Newton said late Wednesday. “Harvard is monitoring funding receipts closely,” Newton said.

    A federal judge in Boston last week ordered the government to reverse more than $2.6 billion in cuts, saying they were unconstitutional and “used antisemitism as a smokescreen” for an ideological attack.

    The Trump administration started cutting federal research grants from Harvard in April after the Ivy League school rebuffed a list of wide-ranging demands from the government in a federal investigation into campus antisemitism. Harvard challenged the cuts in court, calling them illegal government retaliation.

    Harvard has been President Donald Trump’s top target in his campaign to reshape higher education, which has resulted in settlements with Columbia and Brown universities to end federal investigations and restore federal money cut by the Trump administration.

    Trump has said he wants Harvard to pay no less than $500 million as part any deal to restore funding. He reiterated the demand at an August Cabinet meeting. “They’ve been very bad,” Trump told Education Secretary Linda McMahon. “Don’t negotiate.”

    Even as Harvard’s lawsuit played out, both sides had been negotiating the framework of an agreement that could end the prolonged conflict. So far, such a deal has been elusive.

    The government has opened numerous investigations against Harvard and attempted an array of sanctions, including moves to block the school from enrolling international students. A federal judge blocked the move in June after Harvard sued.

    ___

    The Associated Press’ education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

    Source link

  • Trump celebrates West Point alumni group canceling award ceremony to honor Tom Hanks

    WASHINGTON — WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump celebrated news on Monday that an alumni group from West Point canceled an award ceremony set to honor Tom Hanks, with the president calling the famous actor “destructive” and “WOKE.”

    Hanks was scheduled to receive the 2025 Sylvanus Thayer Award on Sept. 25, but the U.S. Military Academy’s alumni association canceled the ceremony last week, according to news reports.

    “Important move!” Trump said in a post on his social media network Monday. “We don’t need destructive, WOKE recipients getting our cherished American Awards!!! Hopefully the Academy Awards, and other Fake Award Shows, will review their Standards and Practices in the name of Fairness and Justice.”

    West Point, its alumni association and a representative for Hanks did not immediately respond to messages and calls seeking comment Monday.

    It comes as Trump has moved to direct the ideology and leadership of higher education institutes and the military in his second term, seeking to assert control with a mix of executive orders and threats of legal action and withholding funds.

    This summer, the Army secretary directed West Point to review its hiring practices, bar outside groups from choosing employees and remove a newly announced hire who led the nation’s cybersecurity agency under then-President Joe Biden.

    Earlier this year, West Point disbanded a dozen cadet clubs centered on ethnicity, gender, race and sexuality in response to the Trump administration’s push to eliminate diversity programs throughout government. The school also rehung a painting of Gen. Robert E. Lee dressed in his Confederate uniform in the library as the Trump administration has pushed to restore Confederate names and monuments that have been removed in recent years.

    The Sylvanus Thayer Award award is named for an early superintendent of the military academy who is known as the “Father of West Point.” It has been given out every year since 1958 “to an outstanding citizen of the United States whose service and accomplishments in the national interest exemplify personal devotion to the ideals expressed in West Point’s motto: ‘Duty, Honor, Country,’” according to the West Point Association of Graduates.

    “Tom Hanks has done more for the positive portrayal of the American service member, more for the caring of the American veteran, their caregivers and their family, and more for the American space program and all branches of government than many other Americans,” association board chairman Robert McDonald said in a June press release about the award.

    Retired Army Col. Mark Bieger, president and chief executive officer of the association, wrote in an email Friday that the decision to call off the award ceremony “allows the Academy to continue its focus on its core mission of preparing cadets to lead, fight, and win as officers in the world’s most lethal force, the United States Army,” according to The Washington Post, which was first to report on the cancellation.

    Last year’s recipient was former President Barack Obama.

    Hanks is among Hollywood’s most politically active celebrities, donating to support a slew of Democratic politicians and progressive causes. He vocally endorsed Obama, Hillary Clinton and Biden in their presidential bids and signed an open letter endorsing Kamala Harris last year.

    He’s also gone to work for the Democrats. In 2012, he narrated a short documentary, “The Road We’ve Traveled,” for Obama’s reelection campaign.

    To fete Biden’s inauguration in 2021, Hanks hosted a 90-minute prime-time television special, “Celebrating America.”

    A year later, he narrated a two-minute ad spot from the Biden Inaugural Committee touting the accomplishments of the president’s first term. He also served as a celebrity co-chair for When We All Vote, a nonpartisan civic engagement organization founded by former first lady Michelle Obama to boost voter outreach.

    And for the better part of the past decade, Hanks has made no secret of his disapproval of Trump and the president’s policies. He called the then-Republican candidate a “self-involved gasbag” during an on-stage interview in 2016. After Trump took office, Hanks said during an American Civil Liberties Union fundraiser that actions like the attempted travel ban for Muslim-majority countries represented a “brand of tragedy.”

    During Biden’s inauguration, he spoke of “deep divisions and a troubling rancor in our land” and warned against attempts to twist the truth by those entrusted with public service during a 2023 Harvard commencement speech. Just this past year, he stoked the ire of Trump supporters after depicting a caricature of one during the 50th anniversary special of “Saturday Night Live.”

    ___

    Associated Press writers Konstantin Toropin in Washington and Jocelyn Noveck and Mallika Sen in New York contributed to this report.

    Source link

  • Pentagon-funded research at colleges has aided the Chinese military, a House GOP report says

    WASHINGTON — Over a recent two-year period, the Pentagon funded hundreds of projects done in collaboration with universities in China and institutes linked to that nation’s defense industry, including many blacklisted by the U.S. government for working with the Chinese military, a congressional investigation has found.

    The report, released Friday by House Republicans on the Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party, argues the projects have allowed China to exploit U.S. research partnerships for military gains while the two countries are locked in a tech and arms rivalry.

    “American taxpayer dollars should be used to defend the nation — not strengthen its foremost strategic competitor,” Republicans wrote in the report.

    “Failing to safeguard American research from hostile foreign exploitation will continue to erode U.S. technological dominance and place our national defense capabilities at risk,” it said.

    The Pentagon didn’t immediately respond to an Associated Press request for comment. Beijing has in the past said science and technological cooperation between the two countries is mutually beneficial and helps the two sides cope with global challenges.

    The congressional report said some officials at the Defense Department argued research should remain open as long as it is “neither controlled nor classified.”

    The report makes several recommendations to scale back U.S. research collaboration with China. It also backs new legislation proposed by the committee’s chairman, Rep. John Moolenaar, R-Michigan. The bill would prohibit any Defense Department funding from going to projects done in collaboration with researchers affiliated with Chinese entities that the U.S. government identifies as safety risks.

    The 80-page report builds on the committee’s findings last year that partnerships between U.S. and Chinese universities over the past decade allowed hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding to help Beijing develop critical technology. Amid pressure from Republicans, several U.S. universities have ended their joint programs with Chinese schools in recent years.

    The new report focuses more narrowly on the Defense Department and its billions of dollars in annual research funding.

    The committee’s investigation identified 1,400 research papers published between June 2023 and June 2025 that acknowledged support from the Pentagon and were done in collaboration with Chinese partners. The publications were funded by some 700 defense grants worth more than $2.5 billion. Of the 1,400 publications, more than half involved organizations affiliated with China’s defense research and industrial base.

    Dozens of those organizations were flagged for potential security concerns on U.S. government lists, though federal law does not prohibit research collaborations with them. The Defense Department money supported research in fields including hypersonic technology, semiconductors, artificial intelligence, advanced materials and next-generation propulsion.

    Many of the projects have clear military applications, according to the report.

    In one case, a nuclear scientist at Carnegie Science, a research institution in Washington, worked extensively on Pentagon-backed research while holding appointments at the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the Hefei Institute of Physical Sciences.

    The scientist, who has done research on high-energy materials, nitrogen and high-pressure physics — all of which are relevant to nuclear weapons development — has been honored in China for his work to advance the country’s national development goals, the report said. It called the case “a deeply troubling example” of how Beijing can leverage U.S. taxpayer-funded research to further its weapons development.

    In another Pentagon-backed project, Arizona State University and the University of Texas partnered with researchers from Shanghai Jiao Tong University and Beihang University to study high-stakes decision-making in uncertain environments, which has direct applications for electronic warfare and cyber defense, the report said. The money came from the Office of Naval Research, the Army Research Office and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

    The Shanghai university is under the supervision of a central Chinese agency tasked with developing defense technology, and Beihang University, in the capital city of Beijing, is linked to the People’s Liberation Army and known for its aerospace programs.

    The report takes issue with Defense Department policies that do not explicitly forbid research partnerships with foreign institutions that appear on U.S. government blacklists.

    It makes more than a dozen recommendations, including a prohibition on any Pentagon research collaboration with entities that are on U.S. blacklists or “known to be part of China’s defense research and industrial base.”

    Moolenaar’s legislation includes a similar provision and proposes a ban on Defense Department funding for U.S. universities that operate joint institutes with Chinese universities.

    A senior Education Department official said the report “highlights the vulnerability of federally funded research to foreign infiltration on America’s campuses.” Under Secretary of Education Nicholas Kent said the findings reinforce the need for more transparency around U.S. universities’ international ties, along with a “whole-of-government approach to safeguard against the malign influence of hostile foreign actors.”

    House investigators said they are not seeking to end all academic and research collaborations with China but those with connections to the Chinese military and its research and industrial base.

    Source link

  • After millions lose access to internet subsidy, FCC moves to fill connectivity gaps

    After millions lose access to internet subsidy, FCC moves to fill connectivity gaps

    LOS ANGELES (AP) — The Biden administration is moving to blunt the loss of an expired broadband subsidy program that helped more than 23 million families afford internet access by using money from an existing program that helps libraries and schools provide WiFi hotspots to students and patrons.

    Jessica Rosenworcel, chairwoman of the Federal Communications Commission, told The Associated Press last week that the agency had voted in July to “modernize” a federal program known as E-Rate to fill at least some of the gaps left by the Affordable Connectivity Program, which gave families with limited income a monthly subsidy to pay for high-speed internet.

    “A lot of those households are at risk of disconnection,” Rosenworcel said after a visit to a Los Angeles elementary school. “We should be clear that it’s not always an on-off switch. It’s about sustainability.”

    The Affordable Connectivity Program, part of a broader effort pushed by the administration to bring affordable internet to every home and business in the country, was not renewed by Congress and ran out of funding earlier this year.

    Mothers of students at Union Avenue Elementary School, which has a 93% Latino student population, told Rosenworcel that their need for the internet has never been greater. They said the cost of rent and food makes it hard to prioritize maintaining a continuous connection.

    After listening to the mothers describe using WiFi in a McDonald’s parking lot so they can take part in remote doctor’s appointments, pay bills, and provide their kids with an internet connection for their online homework, an emotional Rosenworcel called their stories “chilling.”

    “That family and that child are going to have a harder time thriving in the modern world without that connection at home,” she said.

    The E-Rate program, established in the 1990s, has provided more than $7 billion in discounts for eligible schools and libraries since 2022 to afford broadband products and services. According to a data analysis by the AP, it offered benefits to more than 12,500 libraries, nearly half of them in rural areas, and 106,000 schools.

    For the most recent round of funding, the E-Rate program was expanded to include WiFi on school buses. Starting next year, Rosenworcel said, the list of eligible products will expand to WiFi hotspots.

    The Affordable Connectivity Program was helping one in six families in the U.S. afford internet access. Rosenworcel said the decision to include WiFi hotspots in E-Rate was partly a response to the failure to extend the subsidies.

    “Every child needs internet access at home to really thrive,” Rosenworcel said.

    Alex Houff, who manages digital equity programs for the Baltimore County Public Library in Maryland, said the library began a WiFi hotspot lending program right before the COVID-19 lockdown began in 2020 with around 50 devices. She said the program has grown to include 1,000 devices, which still falls short of meeting demand. There are more than 160 people waiting to use a hotspot, Houff said.

    “Most of the time we were hearing from branches that their communities were borrowing these hotspots because it was their only source of connectivity,” Houff said.

    Affordability, Houff said, is the biggest barrier to connection. She said the library system would apply for E-Rate funding to double the number of hotspots it offers to patrons.

    The expansion of the program has not pleased everyone. The two Republicans sitting on the commission argued that E-Rate was meant to bolster and support internet access within the classroom, not at home or other places where students “might want to learn.”

    “The last I checked, schools, which have classrooms, and libraries, are physical locations with addresses; not philosophical, conceptual ideas of instruction or education,” Republican commissioner Nathan Simington said in a statement after the vote.

    Rosenworcel, who took over as chair of the FCC after President Joe Biden defeated Donald Trump in the 2020 election, said the Republican members’ characterization of where the program ought to be applied was too restrictive.

    After the FCC voted to expand WiFi hotspots to school buses, a group of Republican senators endorsed a lawsuit challenging the agency’s decision. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, who led the group of senators, said in a news release that the commission’s new rule was an overreach that would “harm children by enabling their unsupervised access to the internet.”

    Disagreements between political parties aren’t the only threat to E-Rate. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals — the same one where Sen. Cruz filed an amicus brief about WiFi on school buses — ruled at the end of July that the funding mechanism that supports E-Rate and other FCC-administered internet access programs, known as the Universal Service Fund, is unlawful.

    “There is a big cloud of uncertainty over the future of the Universal Service Fund right now because of this Fifth Circuit decision,” John Windhausen, the executive director of the Schools, Health and Libraries Broadband Coalition. “It’s a horrible decision, and it’s totally out of line with past Supreme Court precedent and totally out of line with other appeals courts that have ruled in just the opposite way.”

    Further litigation is expected. The case could be taken up by the Supreme Court, Windhausen said.

    Chairwoman Rosenworcel said she’s confident in the integrity of the Universal Service Fund, saying the Fifth Circuit’s decision is “misguided and wrong.”

    “It’s done a lot of good for the United States to make sure, no matter who you are or where you live, you get access to modern communications,” Rosenworcel said.

    Rosenworcel said the FCC could mobilize quickly if Congress would simply renew the Affordable Connectivity Program, which might be the easiest way to address the need.

    Source link

  • Appeals judges rule against fund used to provide phone services for rural and low-income people

    Appeals judges rule against fund used to provide phone services for rural and low-income people

    NEW ORLEANS — Calling it a “misbegotten tax,” a federal appeals court in New Orleans ruled Wednesday that a method the Federal Communications Commission uses to fund telephone service for rural and low-income people and broadband services for schools and libraries is unconstitutional.

    The immediate implications of the 9-7 ruling by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals were unclear. Dissenting judges said it conflicts with three other circuit courts around the nation. The ruling by the full 5th Circuit reverses an earlier ruling by a three-judge panel of the same court and sends the matter back to the FCC for further consideration. A Supreme Court appeal was likely by advocates for media access.

    “The majority’s hostility to the policies underlying the Universal Service Fund is palpable. That, plus the bipartisan group of seven dissenters, makes it almost certain that the Supreme Court will agree to hear the issue,” said Andrew Schwartzman, an attorney representing advocacy groups including the Benton Institute for Broadband & Society.

    At issue in the case is the Universal Service Fund, which the FCC collects from telecommunications providers, who then pass the cost on to their customers. A conservative advocacy group, Consumer Research, challenged the practice.

    Programs funded through the USF provide phone service to low-income users and rural healthcare providers and broadband service to schools and libraries. “Each program has a laudable objective,” Judge Andrew Oldham, nominated to the 5th Circuit by former President Donald Trump, wrote for the majority.

    The 17-member court is dominated by members nominated by Republican presidents. Two Republican nominees joined five nominees of Democratic administrations in dissent.

    Oldham said the USF funding method unconstitutionally delegates congressional taxing authority to the FCC and a private entity tapped by the agency, the Universal Service Administrative Company, to determine how much to charge telecommunications companies. Oldham wrote that “the combination of Congress’s broad delegation to FCC and FCC’s subdelegation to private entities certainly amounts to a constitutional violation.”

    Judge Carl Stewart, nominated to the court by former President Bill Clinton, was among 5th Circuit judges writing strong dissents, saying the opinion conflicts with three other circuit courts, rejects precedents, “blurs the distinction between taxes and fees,” and creates new doctrine.

    The Universal Service Administrative Company referred a request for comment to the FCC, which did not immediately respond to phone and emailed queries.

    Source link

  • Schools turn to artificial intelligence to spot guns as companies press lawmakers for state funds

    Schools turn to artificial intelligence to spot guns as companies press lawmakers for state funds

    TOPEKA, Kan. — Kansas could soon offer up to $5 million in grants for schools to outfit surveillance cameras with artificial intelligence systems that can spot people carrying guns. But the governor needs to approve the expenditures and the schools must meet some very specific criteria.

    The AI software must be patented, “designated as qualified anti-terrorism technology,” in compliance with certain security industry standards, already in use in at least 30 states and capable of detecting “three broad firearm classifications with a minimum of 300 subclassifications” and “at least 2,000 permutations,” among other things.

    Only one company currently meets all those criteria: the same organization that touted them to Kansas lawmakers crafting the state budget. That company, ZeroEyes, is a rapidly growing firm founded by military veterans after the fatal shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Florida.

    The legislation pending before Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly highlights two things. After numerous high-profile shootings, school security has become a multibillion-dollar industry. And in state capitols, some companies are successfully persuading policymakers to write their particular corporate solutions into state law.

    ZeroEyes also appears to be the only firm qualified for state firearms detection programs under laws enacted last year in Michigan and Utah, bills passed earlier this year in Florida and Iowa and legislation proposed in Colorado, Louisiana and Wisconsin.

    On Friday, Missouri became the latest state to pass legislation geared toward ZeroEyes, offering $2.5 million in matching grants for schools to buy firearms detection software designated as “qualified anti-terrorism technology.”

    “We’re not paying legislators to write us into their bills,” ZeroEyes co-founder and Chief Revenue Officer Sam Alaimo said. But “if they’re doing that, it means I think they’re doing their homework, and they’re making sure they’re getting a vetted technology.”

    ZeroEyes uses artificial intelligence with surveillance cameras to identify visible guns, then flashes an alert to an operations center staffed around the clock by former law enforcement officers and military veterans. If verified as a legitimate threat by ZeroEyes personnel, an alert is sent to school officials and local authorities.

    The goal is to “get that gun before that trigger’s squeezed, or before that gun gets to the door,” Alaimo said.

    Few question the technology. But some do question the legislative tactics.

    The super-specific Kansas bill — particularly the requirement that a company have its product in at least 30 states — is “probably the most egregious thing that I have ever read” in legislation, said Jason Stoddard, director of school safety and security for Charles County Public Schools in Maryland.

    Stoddard is chairperson of the newly launched National Council of School Safety Directors, which formed to set standards for school safety officials and push back against vendors who are increasingly pitching particular products to lawmakers.

    When states allot millions of dollars for certain products, it often leaves less money for other important school safety efforts, such as electronic door locks, shatter-resistant windows, communication systems and security staff, he said.

    “The artificial-intelligence-driven weapons detection is absolutely wonderful,” Stoddard said. “But it’s probably not the priority that 95% of the schools in the United States need right now.”

    The technology also can be costly, which is why some states are establishing grant programs. In Florida, legislation to implement ZeroEyes technology in schools in just two counties cost a total of about $929,000.

    ZeroEyes is not the only company using surveillance systems with artificial intelligence to spot guns. One competitor, Omnilert, pivoted from emergency alert systems to firearms detection several years ago and also offers around-the-clock monitoring centers to quickly review AI-detected guns and pass alerts onto local officials.

    But Omnilert does not yet have a patent for its technology. And it has not yet been designated by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security as an anti-terrorism technology under a 2002 federal law providing liability protections for companies. It has applied for both.

    Though Omnilert is in hundreds of schools, its products aren’t in 30 states, said Mark Franken, Omnilert’s vice president of marketing. But he said that shouldn’t disqualify his company from state grants.

    Franken has contacted the Kansas governor’s office in hopes she will line-item veto the specific criteria, which he said “create a kind of anti-competitive environment.”

    In Iowa, legislation requiring schools to install firearms detection software was amended to give companies providing the technology until July 1, 2025, to receive federal designation as an anti-terrorism technology. But Democratic state Rep. Ross Wilburn said that designation was originally intended as an incentive for companies to develop technology.

    “It was not put in place to provide, promote any type of advantage to one particular company or another,” Wilburn said during House debate.

    In Kansas, ZeroEyes’ chief strategy officer presented an overview of its technology in February to the House K-12 Education Budget Committee. It included a live demonstration of its AI gun detection and numerous actual surveillance photos spotting guns at schools, parking lots and transit stations. The presentation also noted authorities arrested about a dozen people last year directly as a result of ZeroEyes alerts.

    Kansas state Rep. Adam Thomas, a Republican, initially proposed to specifically name ZeroEyes in the funding legislation. The final version removed the company’s name but kept the criteria that essentially limits it to ZeroEyes.

    House K-12 Budget Committee Chair Kristey Williams, a Republican, vigorously defended that provision. She argued during a negotiating meeting with senators that because of student safety, the state couldn’t afford the delays of a standard bidding process. She also touted the company’s technology as unique.

    ”We do not feel that there was another alternative,” Williams said last month.

    The $5 million appropriation won’t cover every school, but Thomas said the amount could later increase once people see how well ZeroEyes technology works.

    “I’m hopeful that it does exactly what we saw it do and prevents gun violence in the schools,” Thomas told The Associated Press, “and we can eventually get it in every school.”

    ___

    Lieb reported from Jefferson City, Missouri. Associated Press writer Hannah Fingerhut contributed from Des Moines, Iowa.

    Source link

  • Schools turn to artificial intelligence to spot guns as companies press lawmakers for state funds

    Schools turn to artificial intelligence to spot guns as companies press lawmakers for state funds

    TOPEKA, Kan. — Kansas could soon offer up to $5 million in grants for schools to outfit surveillance cameras with artificial intelligence systems that can spot people carrying guns. But the governor needs to approve the expenditures and the schools must meet some very specific criteria.

    The AI software must be patented, “designated as qualified anti-terrorism technology,” in compliance with certain security industry standards, already in use in at least 30 states and capable of detecting “three broad firearm classifications with a minimum of 300 subclassifications” and “at least 2,000 permutations,” among other things.

    Only one company currently meets all those criteria: the same organization that touted them to Kansas lawmakers crafting the state budget. That company, ZeroEyes, is a rapidly growing firm founded by military veterans after the fatal shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Florida.

    The legislation pending before Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly highlights two things. After numerous high-profile shootings, school security has become a multibillion-dollar industry. And in state capitols, some companies are successfully persuading policymakers to write their particular corporate solutions into state law.

    ZeroEyes also appears to be the only firm qualified for state firearms detection programs under laws enacted last year in Michigan and Utah, bills passed earlier this year in Florida and Iowa and legislation proposed in Colorado, Louisiana and Wisconsin.

    On Friday, Missouri became the latest state to pass legislation geared toward ZeroEyes, offering $2.5 million in matching grants for schools to buy firearms detection software designated as “qualified anti-terrorism technology.”

    “We’re not paying legislators to write us into their bills,” ZeroEyes co-founder and Chief Revenue Officer Sam Alaimo said. But “if they’re doing that, it means I think they’re doing their homework, and they’re making sure they’re getting a vetted technology.”

    ZeroEyes uses artificial intelligence with surveillance cameras to identify visible guns, then flashes an alert to an operations center staffed around the clock by former law enforcement officers and military veterans. If verified as a legitimate threat by ZeroEyes personnel, an alert is sent to school officials and local authorities.

    The goal is to “get that gun before that trigger’s squeezed, or before that gun gets to the door,” Alaimo said.

    Few question the technology. But some do question the legislative tactics.

    The super-specific Kansas bill — particularly the requirement that a company have its product in at least 30 states — is “probably the most egregious thing that I have ever read” in legislation, said Jason Stoddard, director of school safety and security for Charles County Public Schools in Maryland.

    Stoddard is chairperson of the newly launched National Council of School Safety Directors, which formed to set standards for school safety officials and push back against vendors who are increasingly pitching particular products to lawmakers.

    When states allot millions of dollars for certain products, it often leaves less money for other important school safety efforts, such as electronic door locks, shatter-resistant windows, communication systems and security staff, he said.

    “The artificial-intelligence-driven weapons detection is absolutely wonderful,” Stoddard said. “But it’s probably not the priority that 95% of the schools in the United States need right now.”

    The technology also can be costly, which is why some states are establishing grant programs. In Florida, legislation to implement ZeroEyes technology in schools in just two counties cost a total of about $929,000.

    ZeroEyes is not the only company using surveillance systems with artificial intelligence to spot guns. One competitor, Omnilert, pivoted from emergency alert systems to firearms detection several years ago and also offers around-the-clock monitoring centers to quickly review AI-detected guns and pass alerts onto local officials.

    But Omnilert does not yet have a patent for its technology. And it has not yet been designated by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security as an anti-terrorism technology under a 2002 federal law providing liability protections for companies. It has applied for both.

    Though Omnilert is in hundreds of schools, its products aren’t in 30 states, said Mark Franken, Omnilert’s vice president of marketing. But he said that shouldn’t disqualify his company from state grants.

    Franken has contacted the Kansas governor’s office in hopes she will line-item veto the specific criteria, which he said “create a kind of anti-competitive environment.”

    In Iowa, legislation requiring schools to install firearms detection software was amended to give companies providing the technology until July 1, 2025, to receive federal designation as an anti-terrorism technology. But Democratic state Rep. Ross Wilburn said that designation was originally intended as an incentive for companies to develop technology.

    “It was not put in place to provide, promote any type of advantage to one particular company or another,” Wilburn said during House debate.

    In Kansas, ZeroEyes’ chief strategy officer presented an overview of its technology in February to the House K-12 Education Budget Committee. It included a live demonstration of its AI gun detection and numerous actual surveillance photos spotting guns at schools, parking lots and transit stations. The presentation also noted authorities arrested about a dozen people last year directly as a result of ZeroEyes alerts.

    Kansas state Rep. Adam Thomas, a Republican, initially proposed to specifically name ZeroEyes in the funding legislation. The final version removed the company’s name but kept the criteria that essentially limits it to ZeroEyes.

    House K-12 Budget Committee Chair Kristey Williams, a Republican, vigorously defended that provision. She argued during a negotiating meeting with senators that because of student safety, the state couldn’t afford the delays of a standard bidding process. She also touted the company’s technology as unique.

    ”We do not feel that there was another alternative,” Williams said last month.

    The $5 million appropriation won’t cover every school, but Thomas said the amount could later increase once people see how well ZeroEyes technology works.

    “I’m hopeful that it does exactly what we saw it do and prevents gun violence in the schools,” Thomas told The Associated Press, “and we can eventually get it in every school.”

    ___

    Lieb reported from Jefferson City, Missouri. Associated Press writer Hannah Fingerhut contributed from Des Moines, Iowa.

    Source link

  • Lawmakers criticize a big pay raise for themselves before passing a big spending bill

    Lawmakers criticize a big pay raise for themselves before passing a big spending bill

    TOPEKA, Kan. — Kansas legislators approved on Friday another year’s worth of funding for most state agencies and services after a few lawmakers staged a last-minute public protest over a 93% pay increase for themselves coming next year.

    The Republican-controlled Senate approved, 26-12, a bill with about $19 billion in spending for the state’s 2025 budget year, which begins July 1. It covers most of the spending outside of aid to the state’s public schools, which is in a separate measure that has stalled.

    The Senate’s action came hours after the GOP-controlled House approved the bill, 78-44, so the measure goes next to Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly. She’s likely to sign the bill, but the state constitution allows her to veto individual spending items, which she has done regularly in the past.

    The bill would provide a 5% pay increase for all state government workers, plus larger increases for public safety workers and workers whose pay has lagged behind their counterparts in the private sector. But those increases are far short of the pay raise for lawmakers taking effect at the start of 2025 under a law enacted last year that didn’t require them to vote on the increase.

    Critics of the pay raise managed to get the Senate to include in its version of the next state budget a provision delaying the pay raise at least another year. House and Senate negotiators didn’t include it in the final version of Friday’s spending bill, prompting opponents to complain about the gap between the 93% raise for lawmakers and the 5% raise for most state workers.

    “People don’t trust politicians,” said Sen. Rob Olson, a Kansas City-area Republican. “This is why.”

    Legislators planned to adjourn by early Saturday morning for a spring break and return April 25 for a final five days in session.

    For three years, Kansas has been flush with revenues, and under the spending approved Friday, the state still would have more than $3.7 billion in excess funds at the end of June 2025.

    Kelly and lawmakers want to cut taxes, but a compromise plan from her and GOP leaders failed Thursday. House and Senate negotiators drafted a new plan Friday evening to cut income, sales and property taxes by more than $1.5 billion over three years, but Kelly’s chief of staff, Will Lawrence, said it “far exceeds” what she deems affordable.

    Legislators also haven’t approved a bill with $6 billion in spending for the K-12 public school system. The state’s 286 districts will see an increase in aid between $240 million and $320 million, or between 4.9% and 6.5%. However, disagreements over special education policies led the Senate to reject one bill Thursday, 12-26, forcing lawmakers to try to draft a new version.

    The bill funding other parts of the budget included provisions from GOP senators aimed at forcing Kelly to provide help to Texas in its border security fight with the Biden administration and restrict diversity programs on college campuses.

    House and Senate negotiators decided not to delay the legislative pay raise.

    A bipartisan commission of mostly former legislators concluded last year that lawmakers are underpaid and that low pay keeps younger and less wealthy people and people of color out of the Legislature. The law creating the commission allowed the raise to take effect unless both chambers rejected it by early February, which they didn’t.

    The increase will be nearly $28,000 a year for rank-and-file legislators, boosting their total compensation from $30,000 to nearly $58,000, including daily expense reimbursements in session. Legislative leaders get additional payments because of their duties, and the House speaker and Senate president will make more than $85,000 a year, up from $44,000.

    During the House’s debate, Republican Rep. Chuck Smith, of southeastern Kansas, backed the pay raise by praising the work of the chairs of the House budget committee and a committee on K-12 spending.

    “We ought to be thanking these people for what they do,” Smith said. “It’s unbelievable, the quality of people we have in here.”

    The tone was far different in the Senate. Facing a barrage of questions from Olson and Sen. Dennis Pyle, a northeastern Kansas Republican, Billinger acknowledged that he doesn’t think the big pay raise is appropriate.

    “Something’s very, very wrong,” Pyle said. “It’s a sad day for Kansas.”

    Pay for lawmakers varies widely by state, according to National Conference of State Legislatures data. New Hampshire’s salary is $100 a year — the same as in 1889 — while New Mexico pays $202 to cover lawmakers’ expenses in session but no salary.

    Alaska lawmakers’ salaries rose by 67% from $50,400 to $84,000 at the start of their annual session this year, and New Jersey legislators will see their pay increase in 2026, also by 67%, from $49,000 to $82,000. New York lawmakers received a 29% raise at the start of 2023, making their pay the highest in the nation at $142,000 a year.

    Source link

  • New Mexico legislators back slower, sustained growth in government programs with budget plan

    New Mexico legislators back slower, sustained growth in government programs with budget plan

    SANTA FE, N.M. — Leading New Mexico lawmakers on Friday recommended a 5.9% increase in general fund spending for the coming fiscal year amid a windfall in oil-related income, while also sounding a cautionary note on the future of the state’s petroleum bonanza and setting aside more money in savings and investment accounts.

    The proposal from a lead budget writing committee to the Democratic-led Legislature would increase general fund spending by $566 million to $10.1 billion for the fiscal year running from July 2024 to June 2025. The increased general spending represents a fraction of an anticipated $3.5 billion surplus of state income in excess of current tax obligations.

    The budget blueprint would bolster efforts to improve student achievement in public education, buttresses health care for people in poverty or on the cusp as federal support for Medicaid recedes in the aftermath of the pandemic, and provide pay raises averaging 4% to state employees along with compensation boosts at public school and colleges.

    Support for childhood wellbeing also figures prominently, including a recommendation to increased spending from an early childhood education trust to expand prekindergarten and home visits from nurses for parents of infants and toddlers. The early childhood education trust was established in 2020 amid an extraordinary surge in oil-related income and already contains roughly $6 billion.

    State Sen. George Muñoz of Gallup warned that the state budget is more reliant than ever on income from oil and natural gas — a commodity subject to volatile swings in pricing and production.

    “That’s a very dangerous situation in the end,” said Muñoz, chairman of two lead budget-writing committees. “I think this is a very sound budget. … It keeps the state of New Mexico able to grow over the next couple years without having massive cuts” later on.

    The legislature convenes Jan. 16 for a rapid-fire, 30-day legislative session centered on budget negotiations. Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham can veto any and all budget provisions approved by legislators.

    Republican state Sen. Pat Woods of Grady said he’s urging colleagues in the Democratic majority to be reasonable and slow the pace of recent budget increases.

    “Do we even know what we’re funding is working?” said Woods, one of 14 GOP senators who are outnumbered nearly 2-1 by Democrats in the chamber. “Do we need to maybe hold off from any more big expenditures to get a general idea of where the funding is working.”

    Spending on public schools would increase increase by $243 million, or 5.8%, to $4.42 billion under the proposal from legislators.

    The plan also would significantly increase spending on the state courts system, local prosecutors and public defenders amid heightened concerns about crime and gun violence in Albuquerque.

    State Rep. Derrick Lente of Sandia Pueblo said the budget plan leaves room for $200 million in tax reductions and incentives.

    Lujan Grisham last year used her veto powers to scale back a tax relief package based on concerns it could undermine future spending on public education, heath care and law enforcement. Vetoed items included reduced tax rates on personal income, sales and business transactions. Credits toward the purchase of electric vehicles and related charging equipment also were vetoed — but are back on the negotiating table this year.

    “We’re taking a much more conservative approach for our tax proposal this year,” said Lente, chairman of lead House committee on taxation.

    A rival budget proposal from Lujan Grisham would increase general fund spending more dramatically by about $950 million, or nearly 10%, to $10.5 billion, with major initiatives to shore up homeownership and affordable housing opportunities.

    Both budget proposals signal a likely end to three straight years of bulk state money transfers to New Mexico households. The most recent rebates in 2023 exceeded $600 million in individual payments of $500.

    Source link

  • Lacking counselors, US schools turn to the booming business of online therapy

    Lacking counselors, US schools turn to the booming business of online therapy

    Trouble with playground bullies started for Maria Ishoo’s daughter in elementary school. Girls ganged up, calling her “fat” and “ugly.” Boys tripped and pushed her. The California mother watched her typically bubbly second-grader retreat into her bedroom and spend afternoons curled up in bed.

    For Valerie Aguirre’s daughter in Hawaii, a spate of middle school “friend drama” escalated into violence and online bullying that left the 12-year-old feeling disconnected and lonely.

    Both children received help through telehealth therapy, a service that schools around the country are offering in response to soaring mental health struggles among American youth.

    Now at least 16 of the 20 largest U.S. public school districts are offering online therapy sessions to reach millions of students, according to an analysis by The Associated Press. In those districts alone, schools have signed provider contracts worth more than $70 million.

    The growth reflects a booming new business born from America’s youth mental health crisis, which has proven so lucrative that venture capitalists are funding a new crop of school teletherapy companies. Some experts raise concerns about the quality of care offered by fast-growing tech companies.

    As schools cope with shortages of in-person practitioners, however, educators say teletherapy works for many kids, and it’s meeting a massive need. For rural schools and lower-income students in particular, it has made therapy easier to access. Schools let students connect with online counselors during the school day or after hours from home.

    “This is how we can prevent people from falling through the cracks,” said Ishoo, a mother of two in Lancaster, California.

    Ishoo recalls standing at her second-grader’s bedroom door last year and wishing she could get through to her. “What’s wrong?” the mother would ask. The response made her heart heavy: “It’s NOTHING, Mom.”

    Last spring, her school district launched a teletherapy program and she signed up her daughter. During a month of weekly sessions, the girl logged in from her bedroom and opened up to a therapist who gave her coping tools and breathing techniques to reduce anxiety. The therapist told her daughter: You are in charge of your own emotions. Don’t give anyone else that control.

    “She learned that it’s OK to ask for help, and sometimes everyone needs some extra help,” Ishoo said.

    The 13,000-student school system, like so many others, has counselors and psychologists on staff, but not enough to meet the need, said Trish Wilson, the Lancaster district’s coordinator of counselors.

    Therapists in the area have full caseloads, making it impossible to refer students for immediate care, she said. But students can schedule a virtual session within days.

    “Our preference is to provide our students in-person therapy. Obviously, that’s not always possible,” said Wilson, whose district has referred more than 325 students to over 800 sessions since launching the online therapy program.

    Students and their parents said in interviews they turned to teletherapy after struggling with feelings of sadness, loneliness, academic stress and anxiety. For many, the transition back to in-person school after distance learning was traumatic. Friendships had fractured, social skills deteriorated and tempers flared more easily.

    Schools are footing the bill, many of them using federal pandemic relief money as experts have warned of alarming rates of youth depression, anxiety and suicide. Many school districts are signing contracts with private companies. Others are working with local health care providers, nonprofits or state programs.

    Mental health experts welcome the extra support but caution about potential pitfalls. For one, it’s getting harder to hire school counselors and psychologists, and competition with telehealth providers isn’t helping.

    “We have 44 counselor vacancies, and telehealth definitely impacts our ability to fill them,” said Doreen Hogans, supervisor of school counseling in Prince George’s County, Maryland. Hogans estimates 20% of school counselors who left have taken teletherapy jobs, which offer more flexible hours.

    The rapid growth of the companies raises questions about the qualifications of the therapists, their experience with children and privacy protocols, said Kevin Dahill-Fuchel, executive director of Counseling in Schools, a nonprofit that helps schools bolster traditional, in-person mental health services.

    “As we give these young people access to telehealth, I want to hear how all these other bases are covered,” he said.

    One of the biggest providers, San Francisco-based Hazel Health, started with telemedicine health services in schools in 2016 and expanded to mental health in May 2021, CEO Josh Golomb said. It now employs more than 300 clinicians providing teletherapy in over 150 school districts in 15 states.

    The rapid expansions mean millions of dollars in revenue for Hazel. This year, the company signed a $24 million contract with Los Angeles County to offer teletherapy services to 1.3 million students for two years.

    Other clients include Hawaii, which is paying Hazel nearly $4 million over three years to work with its public schools, and Clark County schools in the Las Vegas area, which have allocated $3.25 million for Hazel-provided teletherapy. The districts of Miami-Dade, Prince George’s and Houston schools also have partnered with Hazel.

    Despite the giant contracts, Golomb said Hazel is focused on ensuring child welfare outweighs the bottom line.

    “We have the ethos of a nonprofit company but we’re using a private-sector mechanism to reach as many kids as we can,” Golomb said. Hazel raised $51.5 million in venture capital funding in 2022 that fueled its expansion. “Do we have any concerns about any compromise in quality? The resounding answer is no.”

    Other providers are getting into the space. In November, New York City launched a free telehealth therapy service for teens to help eliminate barriers to access, said Ashwin Vasan, the city’s health commissioner. New York is paying the startup TalkSpace $26 million over three years for a service allowing teens aged 13 to 17 to download an app and connect with licensed therapists by phone, video or text.

    Unlike other cities, New York is offering the service to all teens, whether enrolled in private, public or home schools, or not in school at all.

    “I truly hope this normalizes and democratizes access to mental health care for our young people,” Vasan said.

    Many of Hawaii’s referrals come from schools in rural or remote areas. Student clients have increased sharply in Maui since the deadly August wildfires, said Fern Yoshida, who oversees teletherapy for the state education department. So far this fall, students have logged 2,047 teletherapy visits, a three-fold increase from the same period last year.

    One of them was Valerie Aguirre’s daughter, whose fallout with two friends turned physical last year in sixth grade, when one of the girls slapped her daughter in the face. Aguirre suggested her daughter try teletherapy. After two months of online therapy, “she felt better,” Aguirre said, with a realization that everyone makes mistakes and friendships can be mended.

    In California, Ishoo says her daughter, now in third grade, is relaying wisdom to her sister, who started kindergarten this year.

    “She walks her little sister to class and tells her everything will be OK. She’s a different person. She’s older and wiser. She reassures her sister,” Ishoo said. “I heard her say, ‘If kids are being mean to you, just ignore them.’”

    ___

    Associated Press data reporter Sharon Lurye contributed.

    ___

    The Associated Press education team receives support from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

    Source link

  • Lacking counselors, US schools turn to the booming business of online therapy

    Lacking counselors, US schools turn to the booming business of online therapy

    Trouble with playground bullies started for Maria Ishoo’s daughter in elementary school. Girls ganged up, calling her “fat” and “ugly.” Boys tripped and pushed her. The California mother watched her typically bubbly second-grader retreat into her bedroom and spend afternoons curled up in bed.

    For Valerie Aguirre’s daughter in Hawaii, a spate of middle school “friend drama” escalated into violence and online bullying that left the 12-year-old feeling disconnected and lonely.

    Both children received help through telehealth therapy, a service that schools around the country are offering in response to soaring mental health struggles among American youth.

    Now at least 16 of the 20 largest U.S. public school districts are offering online therapy sessions to reach millions of students, according to an analysis by The Associated Press. In those districts alone, schools have signed provider contracts worth more than $70 million.

    The growth reflects a booming new business born from America’s youth mental health crisis, which has proven so lucrative that venture capitalists are funding a new crop of school teletherapy companies. Some experts raise concerns about the quality of care offered by fast-growing tech companies.

    As schools cope with shortages of in-person practitioners, however, educators say teletherapy works for many kids, and it’s meeting a massive need. For rural schools and lower-income students in particular, it has made therapy easier to access. Schools let students connect with online counselors during the school day or after hours from home.

    “This is how we can prevent people from falling through the cracks,” said Ishoo, a mother of two in Lancaster, California.

    Ishoo recalls standing at her second-grader’s bedroom door last year and wishing she could get through to her. “What’s wrong?” the mother would ask. The response made her heart heavy: “It’s NOTHING, Mom.”

    Last spring, her school district launched a teletherapy program and she signed up her daughter. During a month of weekly sessions, the girl logged in from her bedroom and opened up to a therapist who gave her coping tools and breathing techniques to reduce anxiety. The therapist told her daughter: You are in charge of your own emotions. Don’t give anyone else that control.

    “She learned that it’s OK to ask for help, and sometimes everyone needs some extra help,” Ishoo said.

    The 13,000-student school system, like so many others, has counselors and psychologists on staff, but not enough to meet the need, said Trish Wilson, the Lancaster district’s coordinator of counselors.

    Therapists in the area have full caseloads, making it impossible to refer students for immediate care, she said. But students can schedule a virtual session within days.

    “Our preference is to provide our students in-person therapy. Obviously, that’s not always possible,” said Wilson, whose district has referred more than 325 students to over 800 sessions since launching the online therapy program.

    Students and their parents said in interviews they turned to teletherapy after struggling with feelings of sadness, loneliness, academic stress and anxiety. For many, the transition back to in-person school after distance learning was traumatic. Friendships had fractured, social skills deteriorated and tempers flared more easily.

    Schools are footing the bill, many of them using federal pandemic relief money as experts have warned of alarming rates of youth depression, anxiety and suicide. Many school districts are signing contracts with private companies. Others are working with local health care providers, nonprofits or state programs.

    Mental health experts welcome the extra support but caution about potential pitfalls. For one, it’s getting harder to hire school counselors and psychologists, and competition with telehealth providers isn’t helping.

    “We have 44 counselor vacancies, and telehealth definitely impacts our ability to fill them,” said Doreen Hogans, supervisor of school counseling in Prince George’s County, Maryland. Hogans estimates 20% of school counselors who left have taken teletherapy jobs, which offer more flexible hours.

    The rapid growth of the companies raises questions about the qualifications of the therapists, their experience with children and privacy protocols, said Kevin Dahill-Fuchel, executive director of Counseling in Schools, a nonprofit that helps schools bolster traditional, in-person mental health services.

    “As we give these young people access to telehealth, I want to hear how all these other bases are covered,” he said.

    One of the biggest providers, San Francisco-based Hazel Health, started with telemedicine health services in schools in 2016 and expanded to mental health in May 2021, CEO Josh Golomb said. It now employs more than 300 clinicians providing teletherapy in over 150 school districts in 15 states.

    The rapid expansions mean millions of dollars in revenue for Hazel. This year, the company signed a $24 million contract with Los Angeles County to offer teletherapy services to 1.3 million students for two years.

    Other clients include Hawaii, which is paying Hazel nearly $4 million over three years to work with its public schools, and Clark County schools in the Las Vegas area, which have allocated $3.25 million for Hazel-provided teletherapy. The districts of Miami-Dade, Prince George’s and Houston schools also have partnered with Hazel.

    Despite the giant contracts, Golomb said Hazel is focused on ensuring child welfare outweighs the bottom line.

    “We have the ethos of a nonprofit company but we’re using a private-sector mechanism to reach as many kids as we can,” Golomb said. Hazel raised $51.5 million in venture capital funding in 2022 that fueled its expansion. “Do we have any concerns about any compromise in quality? The resounding answer is no.”

    Other providers are getting into the space. In November, New York City launched a free telehealth therapy service for teens to help eliminate barriers to access, said Ashwin Vasan, the city’s health commissioner. New York is paying the startup TalkSpace $26 million over three years for a service allowing teens aged 13 to 17 to download an app and connect with licensed therapists by phone, video or text.

    Unlike other cities, New York is offering the service to all teens, whether enrolled in private, public or home schools, or not in school at all.

    “I truly hope this normalizes and democratizes access to mental health care for our young people,” Vasan said.

    Many of Hawaii’s referrals come from schools in rural or remote areas. Student clients have increased sharply in Maui since the deadly August wildfires, said Fern Yoshida, who oversees teletherapy for the state education department. So far this fall, students have logged 2,047 teletherapy visits, a three-fold increase from the same period last year.

    One of them was Valerie Aguirre’s daughter, whose fallout with two friends turned physical last year in sixth grade, when one of the girls slapped her daughter in the face. Aguirre suggested her daughter try teletherapy. After two months of online therapy, “she felt better,” Aguirre said, with a realization that everyone makes mistakes and friendships can be mended.

    In California, Ishoo says her daughter, now in third grade, is relaying wisdom to her sister, who started kindergarten this year.

    “She walks her little sister to class and tells her everything will be OK. She’s a different person. She’s older and wiser. She reassures her sister,” Ishoo said. “I heard her say, ‘If kids are being mean to you, just ignore them.’”

    ___

    Associated Press data reporter Sharon Lurye contributed.

    ___

    The Associated Press education team receives support from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

    Source link